Lesson video

Hello, welcome to history here at Oak National Academy.

My name's Mr. Newton and I'll be your teacher today guiding you through the entire lesson.

Right, let's get started.

Over the next few lessons, we'll be thinking about our big inquiry question, "How far did Norman government change England?" This is the question we'll use to investigate the nature of Norman England and what life was like under Norman Rule.

After the Normans had successfully conquered England, it still remained uncertain how the defeated Anglo-Saxons and then Norman conquerors could coexist in the same nation or state.

How would William rule England? What would he change, what would he keep the same? What was life like for ordinary people under Norman rule? By the end of this lesson, you'll be able to recall some of the key figures in Norman government.

Before we begin, there are a few keywords we need to understand.

A prelate is a senior official in the church, for example, a bishop or abbot.

A regent is a person appointed to govern a country while the monarch is away or ill, and Flanders is a region, now in modern day Belgium and France, ruled in the mediaeval period by a count as a vassal of the king of France.

Today's lesson is split into four parts.

We'll first look at William's leadership in government before looking at some key figures, such as William FitzOsbern and Odo of Bayeux, Lanfranc and Matilda.

Right, let's begin with King Williams' leadership and government.

William the First wanted to be recognised as the legitimate heir to the throne of England.

The man that Edward the Confessor chose to be king after him.

He did not just want to seem like a conqueror.

At first, he considered sharing government with Anglo-Saxons.

Before 1070, there was evidence that William planned some kind of sharing of power with Anglo-Saxon nobles and church leaders.

He was crowned, for example, by an Anglo-Saxon archbishop in Edward de Confessor's new church at Westminster.

Furthermore, at first the leading men of Anglo-Saxon England, including Edgar the Aethling, the earls Edwin and Morcar and the Archbishop Stigand, submitted to his leadership, probably in the hope of keeping their key roles in the government of England.

However, from the start, William looked for ways to reduce their influence and wealth.

Have a look at the illustration on the right.

It shows William the First transferring an earldom to a Norman ally, highlighting a key way in which William reduced Anglo-Saxon influence in England.

Okay, let's have a check for understanding.

Which three of the following people were part of William's government of England before 1070? A, Archbishop Stigand, B, Earl Edwin, C, Earl Morcar, D, Earl Tostig? Pause the video, have a think and then come right back.

Okay, welcome back, well done if you knew it was Archbishop Stigand, Earl Edwin and Earl Morcar.

From 1070, William seems to have given up on power sharing.

He stopped trying to learn the English language and his English clerks were ordered to write official documents in Latin instead of English.

By the 1080s, Normans had replaced most Anglo-Saxons as earls, prelates and large landholders.

Archbishop Stigand was thrown in prison in 1070 where he died two years later and he was replaced as archbishop of Canterbury by Lanfranc, an Italian who dedicated himself to reforming the English church and ridding it of Anglo-Saxon practises and traditions.

The four great earldoms of Anglo-Saxon England were broken up and the land granted out to hundreds of Normans or kept for royal use.

Across England and then in parts of Whales, Anglo-Saxon thanes similarly lost their lands and either became villains to Norman lords or left England.

Some to move to Denmark, others to serve Anglo-Saxon mercenaries as far away as Constantinople.

Their conquerors, the Normans, safe in their new castles, began to lord over their English subjects, insulting them as uncivilised.

William himself rarely returned to England, staying in Normandy after 1072.

Okay, true or false? William never intended to share government roles with Anglo-Saxons.

Is that true or false? Pause the video, have a think and then come right back.

Okay, welcome back and well done if you knew that was false.

But why is that false? I want you to justify your answer.

Is it because A, by 1072, all prelates and earls were Normans, B, by the 1080s, most prelates and earls were Normans? Pause the video, have a think and then come right back.

Okay, welcome back and well done if you knew it was B, by the 1080s, most prelates and earls were Normans.

Okay, let's move on to task A.

What I want you to do here is decide if the following statements are true or false and then rewrite those that are false to correct their error.

So you can see here, I've given you four statements, A, B, C and D.

You first need to decide whether these statements are true or false and then rewrite the false statements to correct the error.

Pause the video, have a go at the task and then come right back.

Okay, welcome back.

So your answers should include the following.

For the first statement, "William wanted to be recognised as the legitimate heir to the throne of England," that was true.

Now, statement B, "William was crowned in 1066 at Westminster by a Norman archbishop," that was false.

Statement C, "From the start, William looked to reduce the power and influence of English earls," that was true.

And then finally D, "Archbishop Lanfranc was replaced by Stigand in 1070," that was false.

So now we've seen which statements are true and false, you then went on to rewrite the false statements to make them correct.

So the first false statement was B and that should've looked something like this, "William was crowned in 1066 at Westminster by an Anglo-Saxon archbishop." And then statement D should've looked something like this, "Archbishop Stigand was replaced by Lanfranc 1070." Okay, excellent, let's move on to the second part of the lesson, William FitzOsbern and Odo of Bayeux.

William granted control of England's government to his regents for the times he was away from his kingdom.

His first two regents from spring 1067 to December, 1067 were his half-brother, Bishop Odo of Bayeux and his relative William FitzOsbern.

And we can see from the scene from the Bayeux Tapestry on the right, we can see William in the centre and Odo to his right.

Sources at the time are very critical of what happened during this period, saying that firstly, William set a very heavy tax on the people of England and then took the money, along with the earls Edwin, Morcar and Waltheof, Edgar the Aethling and Stigand back to Normandy.

Secondly, it was left to William's regents to rule England while William was away and it's during this time that sources criticise what happened.

Odo and FitzOsbern built castles and oppressed the English people.

The Anglo-Saxon chronicles says this about Odo and FitzOsbern's time as regents, "Bishop Odo and Earl William were left behind in England and they built castles far and wide throughout the land, oppressing the unhappy people and things were ever from bad to worse." If you have a look at the Bayeux Tapestry on the right, it shows a scene of castle building in England.

Despite the criticism, this did not seem to damage William's trust in either FitzOsbern or Odo.

Both Odo and FitzOsbern were key to William's military control over England.

When William returned and led an army against unrest in the southwest, FitzOsbern was with him.

In 1069, FitzOsbern took control of York after the first revolt there and in 1070, he was probably in charge of the army that put down Eadric the Wild's revolt in the west, after which he became the first Marcher earl of Hereford.

He is thought to have been responsible for building at least seven castles, including Chepstow in South Whales.

He was killed fighting in Flanders in 1071, depriving King William of his right-hand man.

Odo was similarly key to William's military control of England.

Odo became the Earl of Kent and was then rewarded with further lands across the south and east by William, making him the second largest landholder after the king.

He was probably in charge of the forces that suppressed the Revolt of the Earls in 1075.

In 1082 however, he was thrown in prison.

It is thought that he took knights out of England as part of an attempt to make himself pope.

This was seen by William as a power-grab that challenged his control over the fugal system.

Odo lost all his lands and his earldom and stayed in prison until just before William's death in 1087.

Okay, let's have a check for understanding.

What were FitzOsbern and Odo accused of doing while they were regents? A, oppressing the unhappy English people, B, planning to get themselves made pope, C, plotting a revolt of Norman earls against William, D, trading in London without a proper licence? Pause the video, have a think and then come right back.

Okay, welcome back and well done if you knew it was A, oppressing the unhappy English people.

Okay, let's have another check here.

Are the following Odo or FitzOsbern? Tick your choice.

Now, you can see I've given you a list of details on the left-hand column and you need to decide whether those details relate to Odo or FitzOsbern.

Pause the video, have a go, then come right back.

Okay, welcome back.

So the first detail was Earl of Kent, who was the Earl of Kent? And of course that was Odo of Bayeux.

Then we've got a Marcher earl and that was William FitzOsbern.

Imprisoned in 1082 was Odo and Odo put down the Revolt of the Earls.

It was FitzOsbern who died in Flanders in 1071.

And it was also FitzOsbern who put down Eadric the Wild.

Okay, let's move on to task B.

Read Laura's interpretation, do you find it convincing? Explain your answer using evidence from this lesson.

So let's have a read of Laura's interpretation.

Despite his family connection to William of Normandy, Odo was always obsessed with his own power and influence.

Given vast estates by his king, he used his wealth to establish himself as William's rival.

This came to a head in 1082 when Odo made his bid to be pope.

He underestimated William however and paid a heavy price for his actions.

So I want you to explain whether you find this interpretation convincing or not and make sure you use plenty knowledge and detail and evidence from the lesson so far.

Pause the video, have a go at the task and then come right back.

Okay, welcome back.

So your answer could include the following.

While I agree with some of the details in Laura's interpretation, I do not agree that Odo was always William's rival.

Odo was given vast estates by William, but in return he governed Kent for the kind and fought for William to put down the Revolt of the Earls.

So we can see, that's a great piece of evidence that's being used there.

While it is true that by 1082 he betrayed William's trust and took knights out of England, he had served his half-brother well before that, for example, he was William's regent with FitzOsbern in 1067.

Okay, great let's move on to the third part of the lesson where we examine key figure Lanfranc.

Lanfranc was a strong influence on William and his sons.

Lanfranc was a legal expert from Italy, who as an abbot in Normandy, became a champion for church reforms and for strict monastic orders such as the Cluniacs.

He was a strong influence on William of Normandy and it was probably Lanfranc who gained Pope Alexander the Second's support for William's invasion of England, because the pope was an old pupil of Lanfranc's.

Lanfranc was archbishop of Canterbury from 1070 and led the reforms of the English church, while at the same time ensuring his control was not challenged by the archbishop of York.

Prelates were key administrators in the government of Northern England and Lanfranc's reforms were influential in how church administration was organised.

Lanfranc was also William's regent in England in 1075.

His actions may have saved England for William as he uncovered the Revolt of the Earls and with Odo organised the defence of the east and west of England, which included excommunicating one of the rebel leaders, Roger de Breteuil.

When Odo began abusing his powers in 1076, it took some of Lanfranc's high ranking position to finally challenge Odo's behaviour.

It was Lanfranc who led the allegations against him.

Odo was taken to court over illegally taking land from the church in Canterbury.

Okay, true of false? Lanfranc was the leading prelate of Norman England.

Is that true or false? Pause the video, have a think and then come right back.

Okay, welcome back and well done if you knew that was true.

But why is that true? I want you to justify your answer.

It is true because A, a prelate is a church leader and as archbishop of Canterbury, Lanfranc led all other English prelates, or B, a prelate is a government official and as archbishop of Canterbury, Lanfranc was the top official.

Pause the video, have a think, then come right back.

Okay, welcome back and well done if you knew it was A, a prelate is a church leader and as archbishop of Canterbury, Lanfranc led all other English prelates.

Okay, which three of the following best describe Lanfranc? A, an ambitious earl whose land grabs brought him into conflict with Norman prelates, B, an effective regent who helped contain the 1075 Revolt of the Earls, C, a great influencer who was able to gain the support of the pope for William's invasion of England in 1066, D, an outstanding champion of church reforms that resulted in major changes in the church and monastic life.

Pause the video, select the three correct answers and then come right back.

Okay, welcome back and well done if you knew the correct answer was B, C and D.

Okay, great, let's move on to task C.

What I want you to do here is write one paragraph explaining the importance of Lanfranc to the government of Norman England.

You could include Lanfranc's role in church reform, his importance as a regent and his influence on legal issues, for example, land disputes.

So pause the video, have a go at the task and then come right back.

Okay, welcome back.

And well done for having a go at that task.

So your answer could include the following.

One way in which Lanfranc was important was his role in church reform.

And that was the first bullet point that I asked you to try and include.

So let's see how that answer explains the role of church reform in relation to the question.

Prelates were key administrators in the government of Norman England and Lanfranc's reforms were influential in how church administration was organised.

Lanfranc was also important in his role as William's regent in 1075.

He worked to contain the Revolt of the Earls, organising defence against the rebellion and excommunicating one of the rebels.

A third way in which he was important was his influence on legal issues, such as making sure that church land was protected from land grabs.

Okay, great, let's move on to the final part of the lesson where we look at Queen Matilda.

Matilda of Flanders married William in 1051 or 1052 when they were both in their 30s.

A key supported of William's ambitions to be king of England, she gave him a ship called the Mara, which led his invasion fleet.

Matilda was the first person to be crowned Queen of England in 1068.

And so many declared that she, like William, had been chosen by God to lead the English.

In fact, she rarely visited England, but was William's most trusted regent in Normandy.

She also had an important role in coordinating their relationship with the church.

Matilda was responsible for channelling money raised in England into grants to the church for new churches, nunneries and monasteries.

Matilda was in England during the having of the North and her son, Henry, was born in Yorkshire in 1068 or 1069.

Henry, who became Henry the First of England, was the only one of Matilda and William's nine or possible 10 children to be born in England.

When Matilda died in 1083, William was heartbroken.

As a sign of his grief, he gave up hunting.

Although Matilda had not herself been influential in England's government, she had made it possible for William to leave Normandy when England needed his attention and William's love and respect for her provides his story and sort of insight into a different side of William's character.

Okay, true or false? Matilda never became queen of England.

Is that true or false? Pause the video, have a think and then come right back.

Okay, welcome back and well done if you knew that was false, but why is that false? I want you to justify your answer.

Is it false because A, Matilda became queen in 1068 and spent the rest of her life in England, giving birth to nine children there or B, Matilda became queen in 1068, but rarely visited England, only one of her nine children was born there? Pause the video, have a think and then come right back.

Okay, welcome back and well done if you knew the answer was B.

Okay, let's have another check.

I want you to discuss with a partner.

In what ways was Matilda a key figure in Norman England? Pause the video, have a quick discussion and then come right back.

Okay, welcome back, hopefully you had some great discussions there.

So your discussion might have included the following.

Matilda was the first person to be crowned queen of England, and that made her a key figure in Norman government.

Her role as regent in Normandy allowed William to come to England when he was needed there.

Matilda was also important in channelling English money into church projects in Normandy.

She was influential as mother to Henry the First of England.

And finally, Matilda was influential as a much-loved and respected wife to William the First.

Okay, excellent, let's move on to task D.

I want you to read Andeep's interpretation and ask yourself, "How convincing it is?" Then I want you to explain your answer using evidence from this lesson.

So let's first read Andeep's interpretation.

Although she rarely spent time there, Matilda had a big influence on Norman England.

She did everything possible to enable William's conquest and control of England, most importantly by ruling Normandy so well as his regent that he could dedicate himself to sorting out problems in England without any distractions.

So decide whether you think this interpretation is convincing or not and then explain why you think so using evidence, details and knowledge from the lesson.

Pause the video, have a go at the task and then come right back.

Okay, well done for having a go at that task, and there's many ways you could've approached your answer.

So let's look at what you could've wrote if you believed Andeep's interpretation was convincing.

Andeep's interpretation is convincing.

It is true that Matilda rarely spent time in England, possibly only visiting to be crowned in 1068 and '69.

Andeep is right to see her role as William's regent as being what enabled William to focus on achieving the changes in Norman England's government that he wanted to make.

If there had been a big risk of losing control of Normandy while he was in England, William would likely not have left Normandy.

Furthermore, she did support William's conquest as Andeep identifies, for example, by supplying his flagship, the Mara.

Alternatively, you might not have found Andeep's interpretation very convincing, so your answer might include the following.

Andeep's interpretation is not completely convincing.

Although she was crowned queen of England in 1068, Matilda rarely visited and only one of her nine children was born there.

Her interest in the government of England seems to have been mostly about channelling money raised in England intro grants to the church for new churches, nunneries and monasteries in Normandy.

Therefore, her influence on Norman England was limited as she dedicated her time to being William's regent in Normandy, instead of spending time in England or improving the English church like Lanfranc.

Okay, great, let's summarise today's lesson, key figures in the government of Norman England.

After 1070, William changed any plans for power-sharing and replaced Anglo-Saxon nobles and prelates with loyal Normans.

William FitzOsbern and Odo of Bayeux were important figures in government from 1066 onwards, while Lanfranc became central to Norman England's government after 1070.

Matilda of Flanders, the first queen of England, was most influential as William's regent in Normandy.

Okay, well done on a brilliant lesson and I hope you learnt a lot about William's rule of England by looking at some key characters from his government.

I will see you next time when we continue our inquiry.

See you in the next lesson.